A related problem with Escondido is that the landuse areas boundaries
are attached to road centerlines. This vastly increases the editing
effort needed to improve on them later.
/Stellan
On 2015-03-05 13:30, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2015-03-05 1:14 GMT+01:00 stevea <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
What I understand Martin Koppenhoefer to say are essentially the
same things, but I'm not sure if he understands (or agrees) with
Escondido having large areas marked as landuse=residential. These
are not simply zoned residential (they are), they ARE
(on-the-ground verifiable) residential. So it is OK for them to
be tagged as they are.
Yes, I'm saying the same things. In particular, if you ask me about
these huge landuse polygons in Escondido, I don't particularily like
them. I like detailed mapping, and I believe as soon as someone starts
to map the details he'll have to split these polygons into smaller
ones in order to keep maintainability. I don't suggest to make them
multipolygons and to exclude stuff, this would become a nightmare very
soon.
I would exclude (at least) the main arterial roads from the
residential landuse and also stuff like this:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65592897
And when you did this, you'd already have it all split into much
smaller landuse areas.
Cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
